Why We Need God (punished, Christians, evolution, believers)

[PhillyChief]

Are certain areas of that policy offensive to some religions? Obviously.

But we were attacked because of political decisions that were made, not religious ones. As such, one person's perception of a religious attack is another person's perception of a political one.

I think you've just proved GCSTroop's argument about Americans thinking only in terms of themselves. Look closely at what you're saying. You're saying that because American actions weren't religiously motivated, then the attack wasn't due to religion, yet you also say that those actions are considered by others as offensive why? Religion. Do you see the mistake you just made, or should I go on?

[Alpha8207]

Originally Posted by PhillyChief

I think you've just proved GCSTroop's argument about Americans thinking only in terms of themselves. Look closely at what you're saying. You're saying that because American actions weren't religiously motivated, then the attack wasn't due to religion, yet you also say that those actions are considered by others as offensive why? Religion. Do you see the mistake you just made, or should I go on?

If by 'go on' you mean continue, then you make that call....

If you mean 'go on' as in leave...well...hehehehe

I'm saying you bring up specifically 9/11 which was specifically in America(so America is the subject) and yes, if French people are attacked, French people look at from the perspective of the French, Germans German, and so forth and so on.

So, no, I realize that American policies effect the global political climate, contrary to popular belief, we don't have to check our brains at the alter when we accept Christ.

What you are suggesting is that from henceforth we make political decisions based on the customs, morals, traditions, and, yes, religious implications they cause globally.

Wanna take religion out of that list by eradicating religion? OK. Go ahead.

You'll still have to change the words in your picture to 'American Policy' because you still have the other issues that would cause friction.

9/11 was political, at least PRIMARILY.

That's all I'm saying PhillyChief.

[PhillyChief]

Maybe you're hung up on blame? Like it's an issue of whether the US deserved it if their actions that caused the offense were religiously motivated? Maybe you're hung up on just the issue of christianity being bad, so if you remove christianity from the equation, then you've removed religion from the equation? I'm not sure why you're having trouble with this because it's very simple, and I'll use your own words....

Are certain areas of that policy offensive to some religions? Obviously.

Obviously. So if they were offended because of their religious beliefs, then... come on, say it with me, the attack was religiously motivated.

What you are suggesting is that from henceforth we make political decisions based on the customs, morals, traditions, and, yes, religious implications they cause globally.

Well I think we should be respectful of other's cultures, yes, within reason. Should we direct policy because of the religious offense some might take? No. When you do that, then you have situations like those mohammed cartoons in Sweden or somewhere (see, I'm an ugly American ). Nonsense. But once again, why were the artists and publishers threatened? Because people were offended due to their religious beliefs. No religious belief, no offense, no death threats.

[Alpha8207]

Originally Posted by PhillyChief

Maybe you're hung up on blame? Like it's an issue of whether the US deserved it if their actions that caused the offense were religiously motivated? Maybe you're hung up on just the issue of christianity being bad, so if you remove christianity from the equation, then you've removed religion from the equation? I'm not sure why you're having trouble with this because it's very simple, and I'll use your own words....

Are certain areas of that policy offensive to some religions? Obviously.

Obviously. So if they were offended because of their religious beliefs, then... come on, say it with me, the attack was religiously motivated.


Well I think we should be respectful of other's cultures, yes, within reason. Should we direct policy because of the religious offense some might take? No. When you do that, then you have situations like those mohammed cartoons in Sweden or somewhere (see, I'm an ugly American ). Nonsense. But once again, why were the artists and publishers threatened? Because people were offended due to their religious beliefs. No religious belief, no offense, no death threats.

I say we do away with politics or oil or iron or manufactured goods then so we don't have another Pearl Harbor, Civil War, WWII, etc.

Great points!

[PhillyChief]

It's been said before, removing religion will not ensure bad things won't happen. It will remove a major factor for it.

You can't compare it to oil or iron because oil or iron don't tell you that another nation should be obliterated. Religion does. You may wish to obliterate another nation because you want their oil or iron, but that's something else entirely.

I'd also argue that unlike oil or iron, there is no need for religion.

[GCSTroop]

Alpha, I think to understand 9/11 and why it happened you have to understand the man behind it all. Of course we all know this to be Osama Bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri (his second in command, and probably more *fruitful* thinker) What you have to realize is what first really infuriated OBL in the first place. The thing that really got him up in arms.

*Taking a deep breath*:

At the end of the 1980's Russia and Afghanistan were fighting a pretty large scale conflict. Because we were severe enemies of Russia we supported Afghanistan in any way we could. Osama Bin Laden was just a young pup at the time, and was even said to be scared of the shelling and attacks at times. However, his survival boosted his faith and he became emboldened by it. He grew in the ranks of his fellow jihadists against the Russians and after claiming defeat, the Afghans were quite "high on their horses".

In the early 1990's when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, both were scared for their behinds. Osama Bin Laden offered both countries his support from his jihadist fighters. At the same time, America offered to come and save both countries. With no hesitation, both Saudi Arabia and Kuwait welcomed the U.S. into their countries to help them defeat the Iraqis. This INFURIATED OBL. Why? Because Mecca (in Saudi Arabia) was seen as holy ground and no westerner should have been able to step foot on holy land. This includes all of Saudi Arabia if I'm not mistaken. Yet, both the governments of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait welcomed them with open arms. This drove Bin Laden crazy. They were on HIS HOLY LAND!!! How infuriating?!

In 1993, Bin Laden had one of his henchmen (Ramsey Yousif) bomb the World Trade Center. Fortunately, there were far fewer casualties than there could have been. However, when this did not deter America from leaving the Middle East, Bin Laden's passion for our hatred grew even more. He began to see the fallacies in other American policies and our continuing support for Israel, which is a primarily Jewish country. For those who aren't familiar the Jews and Muslims have been kind of at odds since about the beginning of time

Anyway, our entrance into his holy land, the support for Jewish Israel, and our wanton need for oil all appeared to OBL as justification for carrying out his jihad. But now it is beyond that. Now it is to the point of lunacy.

*Exhaling breath*

Anyway, so that is the story of Osama Bin Laden's hatred of the West, and in particular the United States. I'm sure there's more to it, but that is a brief, or as brief as possible background story to OBL. Now, to the point I was going to make. Without religion there would have been no holy land for us to step on. Without religion there would have been no jihadism in the first place for him to learn his fighting skills. With no religion he would not be mad at our support for the Jewish Israel because the Jews wouldn't exist either. The only thing that might infuriate him would be our wanton need for oil. Yet, I don't see that people would be willing to fly themselves into a building and kill massive amounts of people over a black gooey liquid. It would serve no purpose. They would not be offered the 72 virgins in heaven (or however many it is), and they would not live in a martyr's heaven. There would be no such motivation to do such a thing. I can't see anyone flying a plane into a building for a lack of belief. So, the picture, with it's caption seems so befitting.

[Agility]

I can see where agnostics come from, but to see where atheists come from is a chore.IMO

[Agility]

Originally Posted by PhillyChief

It's been said before, removing religion will not ensure bad things won't happen. It will remove a major factor for it.

You can't compare it to oil or iron because oil or iron don't tell you that another nation should be obliterated. Religion does. You may wish to obliterate another nation because you want their oil or iron, but that's something else entirely.

I'd also argue that unlike oil or iron, there is no need for religion.

Ah but you have to accept that religon has been a binding force over thousands of years(do not count crusades crusades as religous movement) that has done much good as well as bad...just like humans themselves.

[noland123]

All we need to believe in is the Triune God,which is the Father,Son and Holy Spirit and there wouldn't be strife in the world.If we all set our eyes upon the Lord and had the love of the Lord in our heart and the knowledge that Christ died for our sins,there wouldn't be wars.

[Claire_F]

Originally Posted by noland123

All we need to believe in is the Triune God,which is the Father,Son and Holy Spirit.

That may be the case for you. However, it's not the case for everyone.